en vette shizzle-me-dizzle

Menu

An Uzbek man in Colorado is the first person to challenge warrantless collection of specific evidence in a criminal case against him. The Supreme Court effectively shut down less-specific petitions last year. The US government argues such data collection is authorized under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Amendments Act.

Nearly a year ago, the Supreme Court decided in a 5-4 decision that even groups that have substantial reasons to believe that their communications are being surveilled by government intelligence agencies—such as journalists, activists, and attorneys with contacts overseas—have no standing to sue the federal government. The reason? They can’t prove that they have been actively surveilled.

That was a major catch-22, since those who were being watched weren’t exactly going to be told about the surveillance.